User talk:219.77.58.50

March 2022[edit]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Caribbean Coast have been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
For help, take a look at the introduction.
The following is the log entry regarding this message: Caribbean Coast was changed by 219.77.58.50 (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.989831 on 2022-03-01T12:53:57+00:00

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 12:53, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at The Cullinan. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. TwoTwoHello (talk) 13:05, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to use disruptive, inappropriate or hard-to-read formatting, as you did at Gigamic, you may be blocked from editing. There is a Wikipedia Manual of Style, and edits should not deliberately go against it without special reason. Mako001 (C) (T) 13:27, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Gobblet. "吃屎" is not "gobblet" Adakiko (talk) 06:51, 10 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Gobblet is not a Chinese game. This is the English-language Wikipedia. Shall we add the translation for every language on the planet? Adakiko (talk) 07:03, 10 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours to prevent further vandalism, as done at Beno.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 07:09, 10 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address and you are an uninvolved editor with a registered account, you may continue to edit by logging in.

Hello, I'm Adakiko. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Catan, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Flag it as such, if you change it, add a citation Adakiko (talk) 01:42, 12 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi 219.77.58.50! I noticed that you have reverted to restore your preferred version of Paul Han several times. The impulse to undo an edit you disagree with is understandable, but I wanted to make sure you're aware that the edit warring policy disallows repeated reversions even if they are justifiable.

All editors are expected to discuss content disputes on article talk pages to try to reach consensus. If you are unable to agree at Talk:Paul Han, please use one of the dispute resolution options to seek input from others. Using this approach instead of reverting can help you avoid getting drawn into an edit war. Thank you. Jalen Folf (talk) 05:42, 12 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Elevator surfing. Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Materialscientist (talk) 09:07, 14 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week to prevent further vandalism.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 10:30, 14 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address and you are an uninvolved editor with a registered account, you may continue to edit by logging in.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

219.77.58.50 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I clearly didn't vandalise, and was suddenly blocked. What I added to Elevator surfing was clearly not vandalism. 219.77.58.50 (talk) 11:22, 14 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I can't see where you obtained consensus to add your information to the article. You are free to post a new unblock request pointing specifically to the discussion on the article talk page showing consensus. Yamla (talk) 11:47, 14 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

219.77.58.50 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

So we need consensus to add RS sourced information now? It also doesn't make sense for me to be blocked just for adding this. 219.77.58.50 (talk) 11:59, 14 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I agree with you, having cited BI myself a few times, but as the RS page you cited notes, you have to be careful as to whether you're citing their syndicated or original content, since the former isn't always marked and they usually don't vet it.

The important thing when this happens, and especially if you're coming off a previous block, is to not go on and revert, but discuss. It's entirely possible the other editors reverting you either saw something you didn't, or didn't see something you did. It's better to clear up misunderstandings rather than edit disruptively. — Daniel Case (talk) 06:16, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Please do not add or change content without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. on multiple articles Meters (talk) 07:30, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Paul Han graffiti artist[edit]

I see you're getting upset because Utah & Ether have a page and Paul Han graffiti artist[1] doesn't. The difference is in quantity of coverage, as per Wikipedia:Notability, and WP:BLP1E. Utah & Ether are notable per our standards because they have extensive coverage from 2008 (mostly US, but widespread there: Chicago, New York, and Boston), 2017 (international: Australia, China, Singapore), and a reasonable bit over the years in between (Argentina, Italy, Finland). From a quick look, Han only got coverage for one event, being arrested in Japan. If he actually has extensive coverage over his ... "career" I guess we can say ... then please list it, and he might qualify for an article. (Which, by the way, is not an unalloyed good; the article will not just say good things about him, mind, but will mention arrests, jail sentences, etc. So he might not even want it.) But not just for one event. Thank you. --GRuban (talk) 16:48, 14 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@GRuban: The IP has provided additional sources on my Talk page, which I have not evaluated as of this reply. The sources remain in my Talk page's history if you wanna have a look. Jalen Folf (talk) 21:47, 14 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Aha. So that's this one? https://archive.ph/P8Mas Well, it is a separate event, but I'm not going to make an article about this person, and advise against you pushing for it either. The article strongly implies that besides being a graffiti artist, he's also a large scale professional drug dealer. That's a rather negative thing to write about someone, and I would recommend a very, very strong case, much more than one event in Japan and one article from Australia. Note what I wrote above about having an article not always being a good thing; I strongly suspect that a thorough Wikipedia article could be a very negative event in this person's life, and, well, Wikipedia is not The Kindly Ones disambiguation link intended. Unlike a local newspaper article, which will generally vanish unless someone specifically looks for it, a Wikipedia article travels the globe, and is forever. We will write articles about mass murderers and war criminals, but I would avoid the individual drug dealers unless they are truly amazingly notable. --GRuban (talk) 23:36, 14 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@GRuban: So you're saying that the subject actually qualifies for an article? I have no respect for him and others who go abroad mainly to vandalize, just for the record. 219.77.58.50 (talk) 02:52, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Having an article and respect are not related. We have numerous articles about mass murderers. --GRuban (talk) 13:47, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

April 2022[edit]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at Slum, you may be blocked from editing. Meters (talk) 02:32, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced or poorly sourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Capital Citybus. Meters (talk) 02:36, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

You have been blocked from editing for a period of one month for disruptive editing. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. El_C 03:24, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is the discussion page for an IP user, identified by the user's IP address. Many IP addresses change periodically, and are often shared by several users. If you are an IP user, you may create an account or log in to avoid future confusion with other IP users. Registering also hides your IP address.